>> From the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C.  
^F00:00:09
^M00:00:20
>> Thank you so much for coming this morning.  My name is Maria Pallante.  I'm the United States Register of Copyrights, and on behalf of the U.S. Copyright Office, I want to welcome you to my favorite day of the year, World IP Day.  This year's theme as given to us by the World Intellectual Property Organization is "Digital Creativity: Culture Reimagined."  It's a great theme.  It speaks to a lot of things.  It speaks to balance.  It speaks to collaboration, and it speaks to the fact that the digital revolution has changed the way that people create as well.  And for the fifth year, I'm very proud and pleased to say that we are hosting the Copyright Alliance.  Standing here with me is Keith Kupferschmid -- who will speak in a moment -- who is the head of the Copyright Alliance.  And as usual, the Copyright Alliance has brought to us just an extraordinary lineup of creators.  And we will get out of the way as fast as we can so that you can enjoy your morning with them.  But, before we do that, I would like Keith to say a few words about the Copyright Alliance.  
>> Well, good morning, everybody.  It's also one of my favorite days of the year.  My son happens to be born on this day as well, so that has something to do with it.  So I am the new CEO of the Copyright Alliance.  Since the Copyright Alliance has joined in the Copyright Office in this event for the past five years, many of you are probably at least a little bit familiar with Alliance, but let me describe a little bit of what we do and who we are.  We represent over 15,000 individual creators and organizations from all different copyright disciplines, from movies, music, literary works, software, photography, the arts, and so on.  Our objective is to promote and preserve the copyright law and to protect creators so that they can do what they do best, which is to create.  It's a pleasure to be back here at the Copyright Office where I worked as a Policy Planning Advisor many, many, many years ago.  Back then, I can recall being very impressed by the commitment and passion of the Copyright Office staff.  As I returned to the Office in a different capacity, it's apparent that this commitment and dedication continues to be the case today.  The copyright community is very, very fortunate to have an office that is staffed with such devoted and enthusiastic workforce headed by the great leadership of Register Pallante and her legal and policy team, who I see sort of scattered about the audience here.  So, of course, it goes without saying that we at the Copyright Alliance are thrilled to be joining the Copyright Office in putting together what will be a fantastic event.  Trust me on this one.  It's going to be fantastic.  And now, another thing you should know about me is that I have no creative talent.  I can't sing.  I can't play an instrument.  I can't act, and I certainly don't code.  And my idea of creative writing is putting a contraction in a legal brief.  So I consider myself very fortunate to be working alongside and for thousands of very unbelievably talented people, individual performers, video game developers, photographers, songwriters, artists, directors, authors, journalists, and the list goes on.  And that list includes today's panelists.  The group of the panelists that we have here today are truly the poster children for creativity and innovation.  

On Capitol Hill, the press and others like to pit the copyright community against the tech community.  Like the Game of Thrones, this makes for a very compelling story, but really has no basis in reality.  The creative community is partners and collaborators with the technology community.  In many instances, individual creators and organizations are playing dual roles, both as creators of copyrighted works and as technology innovators who themselves develop new technologies or who adopt and drive demand for technologies necessary to the creation and distribution of their works.  There are no better examples of this than the panelists we have here today.  Although I don't have any creative talents myself, as the head of the Copyright Alliance, it is my and my staff's responsibility to use our legal expertise to make sure these creators can make the most out of their talents.  In short, my job is to make sure creators can do their job and get paid for it.  I want to briefly raise three things that we can do to help these creators.  The first is to modernize the U.S. Copyright Office.  Few government offices are more important to the growth of creativity and commercial activity in the United States than the U.S. Copyright Office.  Despite the critical nature of the services provided by the Office, the Office has failed to keep pace with technology and the marketplace.  To be clear, this is not the fault of past or present Registers or the Office itself.  Many of these deficiencies are the result of years of budgetary neglect and structural deficits that have made it impossible for the Office to keep pace.  In fact, if you look deeper into these problems, it's evidence that many of the challenges confronted by the Office can be traced back to the fact that the Copyright Office is within and under the direction and supervision of the Library of Congress.  The Copyright Office must be able to rapidly adapt to ensure that it can offer the tools and resources that all users and staff of the Office demand.  And the best way to ensure this is for the Copyright Office to have control over its IT system, its budget, and its staffing.  Thankfully, there is a growing groundswell of support for modernization, and the Copyright Office seems to be moving in the right direction with its recently released IT plan that is both forward thinking and pragmatic.  To the extent we or anyone else has concerns with that IT plan, these concerns are not with the direction of the IT plan but rather, with how fast the Office is moving in that direction.  The sooner newer, improved systems can be employed by the Copyright Office, the sooner the users of the Office's services can reap the benefits of IT modernization, and we can get closer to a 21st century Copyright Office.  The second issue I'd like to raise is the possibility of a small claims process.  It's an unfortunate truth today that small creators have rights but no remedies.  They struggle to protect their copyrighted works from infringement.  Infringement actions are particularly troublesome for visual and literary artists because of the nature of their transactions and the volume of their work.  One reason for this problem is the excessive litigation costs required for bringing a claim in federal court.  We need to fix this.  One way to do that is for creators to bring small infringement claims before a Copyright Office small claims tribunal, instead of it having to go to federal court.  And that's something we should make happen.  The last issue, before we get to the panel and other speakers -- the last issue I'd like to raise is commonly -- what is commonly referred to as the "all vid proposal."  The all vid proposal is a proposal by the FCC that will require cable and satellite TV distributors to allow third parties to provide subscribers with their own set top box through which to access the TV programming that is licensed to the -- by the TV distributor.  While this might sound innocuous and even laudatory, the all vid proposal does not merely allow third parties to sell TV subscribers a cheaper or better set top box.  What it does is allow that third party, who has not paid a dime to license the copyrighted TV programming, to offer their own commercial video service that includes that programming.  In other words, the all vid proposal will create a class of free riders that don't have to pay for TV programming but are allowed to make money from it.  The primary form of compensation for creative professionals responsible for the video content -- the directors, the writers, the designers, the actors, composers, costume makers, visual effect specialists, film crews composed of grips and cameramen -- they're all governed by complex contractual or collective bargaining agreements that provide for residuals, participation rights, or contributions toward health and pension benefits.  By allowing the distribution and public performance of video and entertainment works outside of these agreements, the FCC is undermining the system by which creators are compensated and harming the very people responsible for the works that consumers want to watch.  While the Copyright Alliance encourages the development of new technologies to bring licensed works to the public in new and innovative ways, we are gravely concerned that the FCC's proposal will permanently and significantly harm these creative professionals.  And so with that, you've heard enough from me.  I will turn things over to Maria.  Thank you.
^M00:09:19
[ Applause ]
^M00:09:24
>> Thank you, Keith.  Thank you for not saying anything controversial.  World IP Day, of course, doesn't come together in a -- with a wave of a magic wand. So I want to thank a few people, if you could raise your hand.  From the Copyright Alliance: Sarah, Eileen and Claudia. And from my team: Syreeta Swann - so shy.  Syreeta is in the very back.  So thank you.  Thank you, guys.  In putting this event together, I also want to thank those of you who are from organizations also putting together IP events today, and also, we're very sensitive to the fact that many of you are running from event to event.  We tried very hard to schedule our event at a time that would not conflict with other events.  We weren't entirely successful there, in part because of Chairman Goodlatte's schedule, in part because of the flights of our extraordinary artistic talent that has come into D.C. today to be with you.  So, as it turns out, Chairman Goodlatte has pre-recorded his remarks today so that we could hold this event in the morning to make sure that we had all of our artistic team here.  And I'll introduce him in a moment.  What I wanted to say, though, is that if you go back to Copyright Review three years ago, you know that the advice of the Copyright Office to Congress was that the time had come for them to step back and look at all of the different issues that a variety of stakeholders were putting forward as the singular most important issue or, in fact, the issue that Congress should stay away from and let the marketplace handle.  And our advice to Congress was that Congress and Congress alone has the role constitutionally of balancing all of those public equities and stepping back and then deciding whether to act or whether to revise the law or whether to monitor marketplace developments, all of which are the domain of Congress.  In making that recommendation, we noted that in order for that to happen, you need to have committee leadership in Congress that has a meaningful degree of fluency in the Copyright Act, as well as a staff committed to that committee or committees that also has a meaningful degree of fluency and a commitment to keep copyright moving from session to session.  ^M00:12:02 And as such, we were absolutely pleased that Chairman Goodlatte first put Copyright Review before the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property and then moved it to the full committee level, where it still is, and as we move to the next session of Congress, I just want to make sure that we all thank him for stepping back and running such an incredibly transparent and comprehensive process.  And you're probably wondering what's next.  And I think you'll find that in his recorded remarks, he answers that question.  So although he's not here, let me introduce him.  
^F00:12:48
^M00:12:51
Some things you may not know about him.  So you know that he is the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.  How many of you knew that he is the first Judiciary Committee Chairman from Virginia in the last 125 years?  Raise your hand if you knew that.  That's an extraordinary fact.  The House Judiciary Committee, aside from looking at copyright law, is at the forefront of some of the most significant issues of the day, including protecting constitutional freedoms and civil liberties, oversight of the U.S. Departments of Justice and Homeland Security, legal and regulatory, [inaudible] innovation, competition and antitrust laws, terrorism, crime, and immigration.  Many of these issues will be the deciding factors in determining the future direction of our nation.  The jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee is well suited to many of Bob's legislative priorities, which are IP, constitutional rights, private property, Second Amendment rights, securing our borders, strengthening our criminal laws, and so forth.  We are indebted, of course, in the copyright community for his very forward thinking and thoughtful leadership, and without further ado, I'd like to introduce, virtually, Bob Goodlatte, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
>> Thanks for the opportunity to give remarks at today's event.  Unfortunately, I had a preexisting commitment in Charlottesville this morning that prevented me from being with you in person.  Three years ago, the Committee began a process to thoroughly review our nation's copyright law, an overdue effort that resulted in gathering input from a diverse range of copyright creators, owners, distributors, platforms, and end users.  Beginning with 100 witnesses at 20 formal hearings, the Committee then traveled to Nashville, Santa Clara, and Los Angeles for three public roundtables with over 60 participants.  Committee staff then followed up with all prior witnesses and those who had expressed an interest in copyright, to develop a comprehensive record of the issues facing the American copyright system today.  What copyright issues did the Committee hear about?  More than most could imagine.  Some of the topics included: In what ways can consensus be achieved in copyright policy?  How does copyright and technology create innovation in America?  What is the proper role of voluntary agreements and how can they be encouraged?  Does the scope of copyright protection need updating?  Does the fair use balance, as it exists today, reflect congressional intent when it was first codified?  Is section 512 working well for all interested parties?  Are bad faith actors abusing the notice and takedown system?  Does U.S. law create the proper framework for the preservation and reuse of copyrighted works that are either deteriorating or lacking copyright ownership information?  Is the current compulsory video license framework the best approach?  How is first sale working in a world of mixed and digital goods?  Does the music licensing system work to the detriment or success of musicians, and is the current compulsory license system working?  Is the termination rights framework too complicated?  Does the U.S. need greater moral rights or a resell royalty?  Does the current remedies framework reflect an appropriate balance between providing compensation for damages, for actual losses, while deterring future infringements?  Does this same remedies framework provide a meaningful enforcement right for smaller copyright claims?  Do the anti-circumvention provisions of Chapter 12 efficiently determine exemptions for adverse effects on non-infringing uses or for security and encryption research?  Are the needs of the visually impaired community being met?  What is the impact of current copyright law upon students, professors, and their academic institutions?  Is the Copyright Office functioning well in its present framework, or is there another framework that would work better?  What are the resources and information technology necessary for the Copyright Office to function well?  While not all of these questions are of interest to everyone in the copyright system, they demonstrate the interconnected nature of U.S. copyright law.  Simply changing a paragraph here and a word or two there in Title 17 may have a major impact far beyond its intended approach.  Thus, it is critical that Congress understand the overall impact of any changes in copyright law before proceeding with formally introduced legislation.  It is also clear that neither a solely copyright owner-focused bill nor a copyright user-focused bill could be enacted by Congress today nor should they be.  Any potential changes to copyright law cannot be based upon mere talking points of interested parties.  Copyright law, much like all of the other titles of the U.S. Code, are about the details.  Words matter, not bullet points.  In the weeks ahead, we will identify areas where there is a likelihood, a potential consensus, and circulate outlines of potential reforms in those areas.  Then, we will convene stakeholders for further work on these potential reforms.  And you have my personal commitment that as the review shifts to more focused work on potential reforms, the process will be transparent, and the Committee will continue to ensure that all interested parties have the opportunity to weigh in on issues of concern to them.  Our copyright system deserves no less.  While no one can guarantee that every interested party will share the same views on every copyright policy issue, I can guarantee that we will have an open ear to everyone who wants to contribute to this process.  All views are welcome.  Thank you again for the opportunity to speak with you today.  When our nation's founders included intellectual property in our constitution, they recognized the importance of creativity to our nation and our economy.  We need to ensure that our laws continue to promote creativity and innovation in the digital age.  I look forward to working with you in the months ahead.  
>> All right.  So you've heard from all of us policy and Washington D.C.-based folks.  It's now time to turn the panel over to the real interesting people, the creators and our creators' panel.  And so I want to introduce our moderator and ask Devlin to come on up here and take a seat.  Devlin Hartline is our moderator.  He is the Assistant Director at George Mason's Law School Center for the Protection of Intellectual Property or CPIP.  At CPIP, Devlin leads CPIP's communication and academic advisory efforts, working closely with CPIP scholars to publicize and promote rigorous research on the law, on economics, and on history of intellectual property, and he also writes a really, really good blog so you should check it out at lawtheories.com.  So Devlin, why don't you come on up?
^M00:19:58
[ Applause ]
^M00:20:02
>> Good morning, everybody, and happy World IP Day.  We have an exciting panel for you, but first, I want to thank Register Pallante for hosting this event, and I want to thank Keith and the Copyright Alliance, and I especially want to thank Sarah for organizing the panelists and handing me all these fancy questions to ask them.  So, thank you.  So we've got three creators on our panel today, and without further ado, I'd like to get them on the stage so we could get started.  The first is Jared Geller.  He's the Executive Producer of the open-collaborative production company, HITRECORD.
^M00:20:41
[ Applause ]
^M00:20:46
Next up is Anna Metcalfe.  She's a ceramic artist and the founder of the wedding registry, Gather, which enables guests to give local art for wedding gifts. 
^M00:20:58
[ Applause ]
^M00:21:00
And, last but not least, is photographer, founder, and CEO of CreativeLive, Chase Jarvis.  CreativeLive is the world's largest live streaming education company focused on photography, video, design, music, and entrepreneurship education.
^M00:21:18
[ Applause ]
^M00:21:22
So we're going to start with presentations from the panelists, and then we'll move into the questions.  Jared, you're up.  
>> Good morning.  It's so exciting to be recognized by -- first of all, it's great to learn that there was a World IP Day, so that's just -- happy World IP Day.  But it was really such an honor to be recognized by the Copyright Alliance and by the Copyright Office to present today.  I actually brought along two videos.  One to introduce who we are at HITRECORD.  I think that's probably the best way to -- yeah -- to explain who we are and what we do.  So, without further ado. 
>> Okay.  Recording.  Hello and welcome to HITRECORD.  I'm Joe.  I started this place a long time ago with my brother, Dan.  And it's a little bit different than your typical internet, social network kind of thing.  The point here isn't to keep in touch with your friends or to follow celebrities or even to showcase something you made on your own.  The point here is to make things together.  HITRECORD is a new kind of production company, and we produce all kinds of art and media.  We've played short films at film festivals.  We published books.  We put out records.  We made a TV show that won an Emmy, and our website and our mobile app is designed to allow anybody to come join this community and contribute to those productions.  And yes, any time one of our productions makes money, the contributors get fairly paid.  So, certainly, if you are an artist of any kind, if you're a writer, a filmmaker, musician, graphic artist, photographer, illustrator, animator, editor, or anything, come work with us.  Or even if you don't fancy yourself an artist but you've got a good story to tell or just something to say, that can make a great inspiration for one of our projects.  If you've got good taste and you want to give feedback on the stuff we're making here, if you want to curate the things that you see on here that you like, that's really valuable.  Or if you don't want to do any of that, and you just want to hang out and watch how it happens and maybe meet a few cool people, that's all right too.  But it's really fun if you join in.  Now, how does this all work?  Where do you get started?  One good place to start is with what we call creative challenges.  So this is for those times when you know you want to do something creative, but you don't know exactly what you want to do.  This site will serve you up a whole bunch of different challenges, and you'll find probably at least one that inspires you at that moment in time.  I issue a lot of the challenges as do the fine folks who work here in this office, but anybody can issue their own challenges.  So, for example, say you shot a bunch of footage, and you're looking for a video editor, you can upload your raw footage and then issue a challenge to editors and say, "Here's all my footage.  Let's see you guys cut it together."  Which brings us to remix.  So when you upload something here, everybody else has permission to download it, sample it, revise it, refine it, build on top of it, and upload their new version.  So, for example, say you're a singer and you're looking for an instrumental to sing on top of, there's tons of great instrumental pieces of music on HITRECORD, and you can write a song on top of that.  If you're an animator, you can go find an illustration, download it, put in the after effects, and turn it into some kind of cartoon.  Writers, you know that good writing is in the rewriting.  So if you see something on the site that you like -- this is a good piece of writing, but I have a different idea for it, do that.  Write a new draft.  Punch it up.  Add some jokes.  Change the ending.  Think of this as a huge worldwide writer's room.  So now comes the question: how does all of that lead to a cohesive, finished product?  So I, as well as other folks who work here in this office, we're always on the lookout for stuff coming through our site that we can sort of take to the traditional marketplace.  Who decides which projects become productions, and who has sort of final cut on how those productions turn out?  It's a simple answer, and it's me.  I'm the director of this production company.  But, like every great director that I've ever worked with, I know that, as a director, I'm nothing without the artists that I'm collaborating with.  Now, like I said before, when one of our productions makes money, we do pay the contributing artists, and I'm proud to say, since 2010, we've paid different contributing artists all over the world almost $2 million dollars.  So, I know nobody wants to join another internet thing.  We all have too many user names and passwords to remember.  But, all those hours you spend on the internet can add up to something, and I'm really proud of the stuff that we've made together.  There's more stuff we're making all the time, and I'd love for you to be a part of it.  So -- thanks.  
^M00:26:11
[ Music ] 
^M00:26:18
So that's who we are.  So you can imagine that we spend -- to make all that work, we spend a lot of time thinking about copyright laws and terms of service and licensing and monetization and all of those things.  And since we spend so much time on this and thinking about: okay, we want to do this, we want to work with artists around the world, and they're contributing their ideas, their art, their IP.  How do we make sure that they're represented fairly and that they're paid fairly and what we do is all very transparent?  And so like I said, we spend a lot of time thinking about the ways in which we do that.  So to be recognized by you guys and actually to get to know some of the people who are here in D.C. working on this stuff is extremely exciting.  And I -- when I told Joseph Gordon-Levitt that we were going to be participating in this, he was excited, so we made actually this video specifically for today.  And yeah, take that away. 
>> We're recording.  Hey, everybody.  My name is Joseph Gordon-Levitt.  I work in movies and TV, and I also started a company called HITRECORD.  It's an online community that works together as a media production company.  Obviously, I'm pretty interested in the topic of intellectual property.  I'm glad we're dedicating a day to talking about it.  I actually think the way that we figure out how intellectual property is going to work today and especially how it's going to work moving in the future is going to be a huge part of us succeeding as a -- as a human race.  So one thing I'll say is in the past, I used to be of one mind, which is, the whole notion that information wants to be free and that anything you can put into ones and zeroes because you can just copy it as many times as you want, it shouldn't cost anything.  It shouldn't be worth money.  And my mind really changed a lot a couple of years ago.  And it was largely this one book that got me thinking of it differently that I really recommend.  And the book is called Who Owns the Future?  And it's by a writer named Jaron Lanier.  His contention is that intellectual property is worth money, and it has to be worth money for capitalism to keep working.  Right now, this sort of notion or you might say, the myth that intellectual property is not worth money, has largely decimated the music industry, is doing quite a bit of damage to the field of journalism, but moving forward, it could damage so much more than just those industries.  And another thing that Mr. Lanier points out is digital information, intellectual property, it is worth money.  It does generate money.  It's just that right now, when we're sort of under the illusion that it's free, all of the money, all of the value generated by that intellectual property, is just going to a few big internet giants like Google, Facebook, etc. because those companies sort of trade information, getting information to its consumers for free while advertising to them and making tons and tons and tons of money because they're not compensating the people who generated the information that they're delivering.  And so the notion that intellectual property in the digital form is not worth money, that's something I think we need to sort of get past and get over.  It has to be worth money in order for our economy to work.  I'll give you another example, and that's my company, HITRECORD.  We make all kinds of things.  We make short films and music, books, made a TV show, and our company is sort of founded on the principle that yeah, actually the artists who do contribute to these things, even though they're making their contributions digitally, they deserve to be paid, and that if we make money as a company, HITRECORD compensates the artists and the contributors whose intellectual property generates that value.  ^M00:30:23 I'm not saying everybody should do it this way, but this is a way that we have found to work.  Over the last five or six years that we've been doing this, we've paid out almost $2 million to different artists all over the world.  It's been a beautiful thing for me.  A lot of people who get paid from HITRECORD productions have never been paid for their art before, and that's a wonderful feeling.  Even besides the actual amount of money, just the principle of getting paid, it feels validating, and I think the folks who do get paid, they deserve to feel validated because their contribution helps to make money.  We designed our terms of service to do this.  We have a unique legal agreement that everybody who joins our site and contributes to our projects because they've clicked a box and they've agreed to these terms of service, and this terms of service lays out this methodology of payment.  That's also important, having fair and transparence in terms of service.  It not only helps the members of our community who are able to get paid for their work, it helps us as a company.  I definitely think the trust that we earned by having fair and transparent terms of service has really benefitted us.  But again, it goes back to the principle then.  Just because somebody's contribution is digital, doesn't mean it's not worth money.  And if some work that someone did made money, then they deserve to get paid.  I'll leave it there.  Thanks for listening.  And again, thanks for having this day, talking about intellectual property.  I think it's something really well worth talking about.  Thanks again.
^M00:32:01
[ Music ] 
^M00:32:07
Thanks a lot. 
^M00:32:11
[ Applause ]
^M00:32:14
>> Good morning, everyone.  Happy Intellectual Property Day.  I, too, was excited to find out that it existed.  And I'm super happy to be here and honored to have been chosen to be a part of this.  My name is Anna Metcalfe.  And I'm originally from Virginia, but in 2006, I moved to Minneapolis where I graduated with my MFA in Ceramics from the University of Minnesota.  My personal work ranges from public art, installation, community engagement, and dinnerware. I'm also an educator.  I teach ceramics at the University of Minnesota, and I also teach business skills to artists all over the Midwest with an organization called Springboard for the Arts.  I'm here this morning as one of three founders of a web-based startup called Gather Art Registry.  We are in our ninth month of our first year.  We were friends long before we were business partners, and we had a lightbulb moment one day.  My now business partner, Rachel, was purchasing a ceramic piece for me for a friend's wedding.  And as I was wrapping up the gift on my front porch, she made a comment.  "Couples should be able to register for art they know and love for their weddings, and I should be able to buy it for them just like I can buy towels and toasters from Macy's online registry."  I said "Yes, they should.  That should be a thing.  And it should be carefully curated and presented to highlight the value of the art in our community to buyers."  So that got us wondering.  What if it was possible for people to register for local art for their wedding, and what if an online registry platform could make it really easy for their friends and family to buy couples handmade gifts?  And that is how Gather was born.  It combines three basic ingredients: art, wedding gifts, and the internet.  We learned how to write a business plan after that.  We began contracting with local artists, and in early 2014, we started Gather LLC.  After an Indiegogo campaign in late 2014, we launched our registry in the summer of 2015.  Now, midway through our first wedding season, we're in the process of adding to our collection and expanding our audience.  This is an example of a product page on our site.  To create -- our mission is pretty simple actually -- it's to create a new market for artists and their work.  It's to provide a platform that meets the demands of a new generation of shoppers and art collectors.  And it's also to educate new audiences about the value of art and handmade crafts.  I personally curate our collection from artists from around Minnesota and Wisconsin.  We offer items like what you see in this image: hand forged bottle openers from antique wrenches, laser etched coasters, hand carved mugs, and original prints.  We also make it possible for couples to commission original work from their favorite artists.  Erin and Jay, who got married last August, wanted to commission Minneapolis artist, Nicholas Harper, to paint an original work for them based on their favorite novel called Geek Love by Katherine Dunn.  He obliged, and after reading the book, he created a painting based on two of the main characters who happen to be Siamese twins.  It was a very interesting collaboration.  This is an image of the unveiling that we had last month.  Like any small business, our path is filled with discoveries and challenges that lead us to make adjustments that benefit both artists and our customers.  However, like artists, we find ourselves navigating systems and structures that have been constructed by software engineers and marketplaces that don't always take the arts or artists into consideration.  Our mission is to create an easy to navigate bridge between the wedding industry and the creative work of artists through an ecommerce platform.  Our challenges are a result of the potential incompatibilities between creative tendencies and audiences that understand the value as being produced by big box stores.  What is true for artists -- that creativity requires an abundance of time, the willingness to be open to unexpected outcomes, and that innovation requires constant change -- are actually the very things that make our mission challenging in a marketplace that demands fast turnarounds, consistency, and predictability.  Where an artist finds time to be an asset, our customers are looking for shortcuts and fast shipping.  Where an artist -- where constant change is a positive marker for growth in an artist's career, our customers are depending on consistency.  Where artists seek the unexpected, our customers don't tend to appreciate surprises in the same way.  So our task is to work enough within systems and the markets that encourage entrepreneurship in the arts all while continuing to support individual artists to do what they do best.  We are fully aware that our job is not to convert the masses into art supporters, but we are also aware that even art consumers live in the same world that covets convenience, and we would be foolish to ignore the opportunities that the Internet has provided to small businesses.  Whether that means we have to tweak the online platform we use to make it work for original art or repackage a traditional concept for our clients, Gather is a matchmaker between the arts and the rest of the world.  Our hope is that with time and effort, the systems will be more willing to accommodate a different version of productivity and value as offered by individual artists.  Thank you all again for having me, and happy Intellectual Property Day. 
^M00:38:56
[ Applause ]
^M00:39:03
>> Thanks, Anna.  Chase, you're up.  
>> Got a couple of slides, couple very basic ones.  Maybe you can skip to the next one.  Or I'll do that one and then go ahead and play this video.  This is just a brand reel of what I do. 
^M00:39:20
[ Music ] 
^M00:39:32
>> This is what we do.
^M00:39:33
[ Music ] 
^M00:40:02
That's incredible.
^M00:40:04
[ Music ] 
^M00:40:38
>> All right.  So I'm guessing that by watching that, you actually have no clue what I do.  And that's sort of my point actually.  This is the classic five paragraph essay that you learned to write in college.  I'm going to tell you what I'm going to tell you, and then I'm going to tell you three things, and then I'm going to tell you what I told you.  So the first thing is that my goal here is to share with you all what is happening on the streets.  We represent a vast sort of different spectrum of creators.  And it's my hope to come to Washington and share a message that the world, the laws, have to sort of be consistently evolving.  So the point one here is that we are all hyphens.  I started out -- first of all, I dropped out of -- well, I bailed on a career in professional soccer, bailed on medical school, and dropped out of a Ph.D. in Philosophy.  My poor parents.  Right?  In order to become a photographer.  That's very strange for the people in my family.  But I was a photographer, and then I figured out how to be a photographer, and then I figured out how to make money.  So I became sort of a business person.  And then I became a director.  I started directing videos and short films and television commercials.  And then I was a guest speaker.  I keynoted all over the world, and then I was the author of three books.  In 2009, I created the first iPhone app that shared photos to social networks.  So it was pre-Instagram.  We had millions of users.  And it fundamentally helped to shape the photo-sharing economy that you know today.  Now, that was by a photographer.  My photo studio became a little incubator.  Again, millions of downloads all over the world, and that was the App of the Year in 2009.  That is a fundamental sort of shift.  So I was a software developer then.  And that helped me understand how technology and creativity can work together.  So in 2010, we spawned this little company called CreativeLive out of a room that was a third the size of this with the goal of educating the world's creators.  So I took an audience of a million people that I had built over the course of five years and put them in connection with my peers, who are the best photographic, design, music educators in the world, and that company is called CreativeLive.  Our first class had 50,000 people in it.  And today, we're the largest, live streaming education company in the world.  We reach millions of creators all over the world.  We've raised about $40 million.  We've had more than two billion minutes of creative education consumed on a video platform. So what am I now?  Am I a CEO?  Am I a founder?  Am I a company guy?  What am I?  The point is we're all hyphens.  There's like 15 different things, and we used to be just one thing, and now, we are many.  So that's point one.  I'm going to show a little video.  This is a thing that just dropped yesterday.  It's a little bit of an idea of who we work with at CreativeLive and what we do.  So I've got one more video here actually.  Where's that?  Go ahead and play this video if you would.  
^M00:43:43
[ Music ] 
^M00:43:59
>> Hey everybody.  How's it going?  I'm Chase Jarvis, photographer, founder, and CEO of CreativeLive.  At CreativeLive, we believe that there's creativity inside of every person regardless if you're an artist, an entrepreneur, a teacher, any profession.  The hard part is unlocking that creativity and inspiration and taking real action every day.  To help with that, I'm super excited today to announce a new series of videos that's going to help you live your dreams and career, hobby and life.  That series of videos is called Thirty Days of Genius. 
^M00:44:29
[ Music ] 
^M00:44:35
This is certainly the most exciting and inspirational series of videos that CreativeLive has ever made and definitely one of the most exciting things I've personally ever been a part of.  Signing up is super easy.  Go to creativelive.com/30daysofgenius.  That's number 3-0, days of genius.  Click that blue button, and then every day you'll get one of these videos in your inbox.  These videos are the things that are going to help you make a change that you want to see in your life.  
^M00:44:58
[ Music ] 
^M00:45:05
>> So again, what are we?  We're all hyphens.  That was a program that just dropped yesterday.  There's already 7,000 students registered for that class.  And over the course of the next month, I bet we'll see 100,000 students registered for this class.  And those are just your creators down the street.  This isn't just teaching about wedding photography.  We absolutely -- we have the best curriculum in the world for that, I believe, in photography, design, filmmaking.  And we teach people real business skills too, which is something that art school does not do.  But I mean, you see names like Richard Branson, Jared Leto.  This is a global community that cares about the future of creativity.  Now, point two is that we are creating differently, faster than ever before.  So this is a very risky thing what I'm about to do, but there's risk in creativity.  I don't know if we can do this in Washington, D.C.  There's a lot of suits.  I've heard from many people say they're not creative.  But we're going to try and actually do something real quick here.  First of all, I'm going to surprise her and take a picture with the Register.  All right.  So we're creating a photograph together.  Now, this is the riskiest part of all.  I'm going to ask that you guys do something that you were not prepared to do today, and I'm going to record it.  I'm going to make a little video on a thing called Snapchat.  We'll talk about that in a second.  So, this is a serious endeavor.  I need serious faces.  Put your laptops down for a second and join me.  I'm serious here.  This is -- I want you to do this for like 15 seconds.  Okay?  Can we do this?  You don't even know what you're going to do so it's hard to say yes, right?  So join me in clapping.  Okay, ready?  
^M00:46:48
[ Clapping ]
^M00:47:02
OK.  Well done.  So what have we done?  Right now, we have taken a photograph.  We have just made a video on my Snapchat.  You don't even know what that is yet, but we made a video together.  We collaborated.  This is how creators are working these days.  In terms that used to be -- that's not the only way they're working, but these are just new ways that we're working.  So in, say, a film production, those schedules are weeks, months, years.  The new schedule for creators are minutes, hours, days.  And the laws that we have, they don't address that.  Now you can be saying -- that's just -- this is just child play.  Snapchat is a thing that my 14-year-old uses.  I could get paid a lot of money for this.  And people do.  10, 20, 25 grand.  I don't think there's a person in this room who wouldn't want 25 grand for creating the thing that we just created together.  So my point is that things are different.  And we need laws, and we need mentality that can address it.  So that's point two.  And point three is that we all have real reach.  I'm going to push that thing out, whether you like it or not, to two million people.  The irony is not lost on me.  It is absolutely a point that I'm trying to make.  I had the good fortune of being at the White House yesterday -- last week with President Biden.  And he hosted -- sorry, Vice President Biden, yeah.  He won't mind.  Obama doesn't care about that stuff.  Regardless of what side of the aisle you're on, I had the good fortune of being with Vice President Biden and some other influencers, whatever that term mean.  And they were YouTube influencers, and Biden made a really important point.  And that point was, hey, a couple weeks ago, I was at the Oscars, and I made a speech about the campaign called "It's On Us," ending assault on women and vulnerable men.  And it's a very powerful campaign that I'm very proud to be a part of, but he said something to the eight of us, it was really -- it struck me.  It was like, "I was on Oscars, and the reach of that is about 30 million people."  The audience that we have collected here in this room today, the eight of you, you have a reach of 40 million people on a daily basis.  So what we are doing is we are sharing at scale, without permission, differently, faster, I would say, more effectively, than ever before.  So, I promised a five paragraph essay.  I told you what I was going to tell you.  I'm telling you these three points, and now I'm very, very excited to sit down here and talk with my sort of esteemed colleagues about what the future of creativity, specifically, digital creativity, means and how it's different.  I appreciate your time.  I'm Chase, and I just hit my mic.  I'm going to do it one more time because it's cool, and so remember, it's different, it's faster, and we need laws and mentality to address it.  Thank you.
^M00:50:17
[ Applause ]
^M00:50:23
>> Thank you, Chase.  And thank you everyone else.  Those were great presentations.  So I want to start with asking you guys the same question, and then we'll move to the individual questions.  And so my first question is - I just want to give the audience some background information about you.  And could you tell everybody what is it that brought you to the arts?  And I'd like to start with Anna.  
>> Gosh, I actually didn't consider myself an artist for a really long time.  There is something intimidating about calling myself an artist.  And I think it was probably when I went to graduate school to get my Masters of Fine Art that I decided to call myself an artist.  But I think ultimately, it wasn't even a choice that I made.  It was simply making the inevitable choice and material -- I'm a ceramic artist, and so, getting my hands actually in material, transforming material, fire, and food -- those kinds of things have always compelled me, and I think, will probably continue to compel not only the work that I make but then also how I connect with communities, which I think is truly what now compels me about being an artist, which is communicating and effectively giving voice to a lot of different people.  
>> Great, thanks.  Chase?
>> I'd love -- I'll reference two words, sort of community and voice.  That was really important to me.  I felt a dramatic pressure, and I don't think it was family specific.  Maybe a little bit, but when I was growing up, it was - "the creative kid" was a weird moniker.  And so I ran the other way.  I became the captain of the football team because I wanted to sort of fit in.  I ended up going to college on a soccer scholarship, but my whole sort of being was in conflict, and ultimately, the ability to create something is a thing that is uniquely human.  It differentiates us from almost every species on the planet, the ability to have a voice for underserved community, for connection, for empathy.  To me, that was something that if I could figure out a way to get paid would make this a life worth living.  I think again I referenced earlier people saying in this room that they don't think of themselves as creative.  Everything in this room -- it's a pretty beige room honestly - but was created by no one who was no smarter or no creative than anyone else.  It's really about unlocking that creativity.  And if I could play a role in that for myself and ultimately, I've learned later in my career, that's what I want to do for others, that it would be a life well lived.  So it's sort of a calling but more than anything, an awareness that this is one of the reasons we're here.  
>> Great.  Jared, what brought you to the arts? 
>> I was really fortunate enough to grow up in New York, and my parents took me to live Broadway shows when I was a kid.  And being in the audience and being in the same room with the audience and the performers at the same time and feeling what they're feeling at the same time, it felt like I was a part of it, because I felt like if I wasn't here, maybe the performance would be different.  And so from the very early age I wanted to always be a part of that feeling, being a part of sharing ideas and art in such a visceral and immediate way.  And I started working out in theater.  I worked off Broadway shows as a -- doing anything that I could do just to be a part of it.  And I worked as a P.A., and then a stage manager, and then I just started producing my own shows, and so yeah, and I think that actually having a background with live and experiencing things live and immediately really speaks to what we're talking about here today with the digital format because what we do, like Chase said, he's going to push this out, something that we made together to two million people, and that's exciting.  And the fact that we can share that together is inspiring and really exciting to me. 
>> Great.  So the rest of my questions are aimed at one particular person, but if the other panelists want to jump in, feel free.  So, Chase, I'm going to start with you.  You created an online classroom, bringing together creators with the world's top experts in their fields.  And what is it about the current creative economy that led you to develop this dynamic website? 
>> Oh, man.  There's a -- it's a convergence of many things.  I like the question because it addresses a -- what I think that is there's a real need and a vacancy, that we value creativity.  Look at all of the industry around creativity.  As I mentioned earlier, everything in your world was designed.  It was first concepted by an artist before it was manufactured.  And there's a real disconnect between -- we throw around words like innovation and creativity, but we don't know what that means, and we don't know where it comes from.  Well, it comes from fostering and nurturing that.  And we can't have a culture that values it, but a system that doesn't provide for it, which is currently -- the education system is very, very broken in our country.  One of the first things to get cut, the arts programs.  And so, I recognize that, and with a bunch -- to be crystal clear, it's myself plus it's a hundred other people who go to work at CreativeLive every day with the vision of helping people live that life.  And there's another disconnect around sort of the ability to make a living and a life as a creative.  We talked about this last night at the bar.  I don't know if I'm supposed to say that.  And it's -- art school currently does not create -- there's no part of the curricula that has anything to do with the business.  And so at CreativeLive, we wanted to connect millions of creators all over the world who are interested -- and these are people who are going not just from one to ten in their career.  They're already identified as a creative, and they're becoming more creative, or they're having a more successful career, but these are also people who are going from zero to one.  These are people who are working at Amazon or in an accounting firm, and they've been told their whole life that they weren't creative.  My Mom is a great example.  Told her whole life she wasn't creative and then I gave her an iPhone, and with that little app I created in 2009, and she went instantly from being not recognized as creative to the most creative of all her friends.  "Joy, your pictures are incredible."  Now, those two communities are both underserved.  So by creating CreativeLive, we were hoping to sort of support that, support the areas, the gaps in our culture that were missing at this point, and teach them how to make a living and a life from people who are actually doing it.  This is not an academic institution.  It is very much a practical, hands-on, skill-based learning.  And when you have instructors, who are world-class experts, and I'm talking -- I mean, you saw the list of names:  Pulitzer Prize winners, New York Times best-selling authors, Grammy award winners, Oscar award winners.  These are people that are coming back and giving back to their community.  They're also getting compensated, but to me, that's a gap in the sort of marketplace and intellectual cultural space that we needed to fill.  
>> Great, thank you.  Jared, some other questions.  So what first sparked your decision to explore online collaboration and use digital tools to create and distribute works? 
>> It's funny.  There was no decision really.  This was something that, especially for me, well, for me, personally, was something that just happened pretty organically.  Like I said, I have a background in live shows and live art.  And I had worked on a play with Joe Gordon-Levitt.  And I think it was about ten years ago, he put this -- this is before YouTube.  So, I guess, it was more like 11 years ago.  He put up an online journal called HITRECORD where he thought, "A lot of people know me as an actor, but they don't know me as a writer.  They don't know me as a musician."  And so he put up a journal, a blog that would -- he would put up writing, and he would put up video and music, and people would download it.  This is before click-to-play video.  And a community started to crop up.  People were writing to him what they thought about his art, and then it became a little bit more of a dialogue, and Joe would respond to what people were saying.  And then I remember he made a very crucial decision as to: do we put up a message board?  Do we put up a message board so people can talk more, faster, and the dialogue can just get more specific?  ^M01:00:02 And it was a big decision, and he put up this message board.  And what we -- what started happening almost instantaneously was not, "Hey, I'm going to put this thing up, and then you respond to it."  It was -- there was a natural progression that people wanted to start creating together.  And on this message board with just a few hundred people at the start, the very first collaboration that we had or that was up on the message board was a word association game where somebody would say a word and then another person would say the first thing that popped to mind.  And then that evolved into thousands and thousands of words, and then somebody had the idea, "Let's take all these words and make a story out of it."  And so I think people have the natural tendency to want to create together.  And after more and more of these threads with different -- there was a writing collaboration and a music collaboration and a video collaboration -- we started talking and said, there's -- people want to do this.  Let's provide a -- we've got to create -- we're developing this creative community and sometimes providing some creative direction.  How can we really make -- turn this into something where we're making real productions, authoring in terms of service, making it legal and paying people?  And that's what we did, and starting in 2009, we started building the tech infrastructure and the legal infrastructure to do that.  So, I mean, just to answer your question more succinctly, it wasn't a decision as much as it was a natural progression.  And I think that's what makes our community so special is that it wasn't -- it's not a marketing campaign.  It's not something that we forced.  If you were to say how do you make an online community, I wouldn't be able to answer it.  But yeah.  
>> Great, thanks.  Anna, so what are some of the challenges that you faced when trying to connect with your audiences?  People looking for wedding gifts, but they've never heard of Gather?  
>> Yeah.  Well, I think it's kind of a two part answer.  One is it boils down to sort of straight up marketing and the ability to just get a product out into the world.  We have lots of mechanisms to do that.  Right now, I think the most exciting part about our business model and the way that we do it is that there's this whole industry where people get hitched all the time.  And there's a gift economy associated with getting married.  And so when two people decide they're going to do that, they send out our information, as any kind of wedding registry or any kind of ecommerce platform at this point, to 250, 300 of their favorite friends.  And so those people are really doing our marketing for us, which is actually kind of a cool thing.  I think -- and so I think our challenge is to get the interest of that original couple, the sort of -- our original client, if you will, and one of the things that is really exciting about that is that they tend to be younger, and they tend to be interested.  They have all of the towels and the toasters that they need.  And so they tend to be interested in doing something unique and so when we intersect with those couples, the people who are interested in registering with Gather or anybody who's interested in setting up a gift registry for that matter, it's a matter of communication, and I think that's the second part of it is how do we effectively talk about value and curation?  What is it that makes the artist that we represent excellent?  I think the idea of excellence is something that we -- is a conversation that is evolving as we put our work out into the world.  How do we curate and how do we consider different works of art to be excellent?  And we really work hard on trying to communicate that gap between what are the -- I have this user experience when I go into Macy's online.  I'm going to pick on Macy's.  Their online registry page.  I feel like that's the kind of user experience I want to have, and so does that -- can that translate into bringing the fine art object to my life?  And our task is to say yes, it is.  There are some things we have to negotiate, but -- and effectively communicating those differences is really kind of our challenge. Yeah. 
>> All right, thanks.  Chase, there's a lot of talk in the arts community about finding ways to support artist-centered technologies.  What's the value in artists developing their own online platforms to distribute and make creative content? 
>> Well, it's the first time in the history of the world that we are not bound by gatekeepers.  We require no permission now to share at scale.  It used to be we were kept out by the gallerists, by the photo editor, by the art director, or the creative director at the agency.  And now with the benefits of technology, you can reach that same scale or much greater, as in my earlier example, at the push of a button.  So what that creates is in many ways a sense of freedom.  And the technology -- the sort of technology community -- I don't want to put crosshairs on their back.  I think Joe is wise to point out that Google and Facebook and others are making billions, hundreds of billions of dollars.  But the message isn't that they should not exist or that we should continue on the paradigm.  It is a very, very dynamic and complicated thing.  For me, technology literally created my career.  I was a very sexy?  I was a very sexy photographer.  I was a very successful photographer pre-internet because I learned the value of my work early, and that was out of necessity.  I needed to eat.  I needed to put food on the table so I'm not naturally gifted in business.  I had to become that.  And I was very happy with my career and then in a pre-YouTube -- it was called Google Video at the time, where you could put up videos, I started telling the story of what I call the black box of photography.  It was a very closed world, and if you were out there sharing a point of view, you were sort of -- the industry or the people that were comprised of the leaders in the industry were very upset with you.  I was vilified, in fact, for sharing the first videos that I was -- about what it was like to go on location.  It doesn't matter -- I was shooting for the Nikes and the Apples and Fortune 100 brands, and telling the story about what it was like to do that, effectively opening up this sort of black box, and sharing secrets was a very risky proposition, and you might be sitting in the audience judging, thinking, "Well, geez, why aren't you undermining your own livelihood?"  But the reality is that we need to -- there needs to be some sort of middle ground between pretending that that doesn't exist, a head in the sand mentality, and acknowledging that information is moving faster than ever before.  So it was my very proactive decision to sort of open that up and to help other people become -- I wanted to take a world of just millions of photographers and make it into a world of billions of photographers.  And make the image more popular than the word.  And that again may be controversial, but that enabled -- that was only enabled through technology.  And my career was able to grow very, very quickly when that sort of paradigm flipped because no one was using the medium.  So I sort of stepped into a vacuum.  And this isn't just about me.  This is about so many of the other -- I will call them thousands if not millions of creators who have been able to now make a living.  I mentioned earlier that there are people who will pay 20 thousand bucks for the little video that we made right there.  Maybe not that one because that was pretty boring honestly.  But the point is that there is a new economy, and we are experiencing seismic shifts in how the technology world and the creative world are interacting.  I think it's, by and large, up to us to define whether that will be positive or not.  
>> Great.  So, Jared.  Your organization is unique to say the least.  And I'm wondering why do you use non-exclusive licenses and why do you invite creators to the table to discuss revenue sharing? 
>> So, I think the internet can be, probably is, a very scary place, and when -- every so often when a social network you're on, like Facebook or Instagram, updates their terms of service and certain elements are revealed that organizations want to make money through your IP in certain kinds of ways, we all freak out.  We're very transparent with our -- with what we're doing at HITRECORD.  It's very important to create a really safe environment if you're going to create art together.  So we're very clear and transparent with what it is we do and how it is we make things.  And that really -- and if you're going to do that and you're going to have that dialogue, it has to be fair.  And we're very active with that dialogue.  In terms of non-exclusivity, we want you to be able to use your IP to do whatever you want to do.  ^M01:10:49 We don't want to own it.  We don't want to control your ideas.  But we are a for-profit organization so if we can figure out a way to make money with your ideas in combination with everybody else's ideas, there needs to be some sort of agreement.  And so we enter into that.  And when we talk about profit sharing, we've -- as Joe mentioned in the video -- we've paid out -- at the end of this year, it'll be closer to 2.5 million dollars.  And when we were thinking of our terms of service and laying out our monetization policy, we wanted to make it efficient and just make a formula or create an algorithm and just say, "All right, that's how you get paid."  But it's not -- that's not how it works.  Every piece of art is different.  Every ingredient to that piece of art is different.  And how you feel about that piece of art is different.  So what we do is every pay period, we take the money that was made for that project.  We post those profits on the site for everybody to see, and we say, "These are all of the elements that went into this project."  Whether it's a music video, whether it's a television episode, whether it's a TV commercial, whether it's a vinyl record.  We say, "These are all the things that went into it."  And this is what we think is a fair split amongst everybody.  And the community has two weeks to have an open dialogue about that.  Now, we've been doing it for six years.  So there are pretty much -- a lot of the question marks and variables as to how this would work in different cases, there's a precedent for it.  But for two weeks, we have an open discussion.  Some people say, "You forgot me."  Or, "Maybe I should get more."  Or, this person may be, "I want to give mine to this."  And we have that discussion.  And at the end of two weeks, we say, "Okay, we take that feedback into consideration, and then we make a decision."  And what we have found is that people, of course, love getting paid and recognized for what they do.  But I should say the attribution and the credit is almost as important, if not more important, just that people know that they got credit for what their contribution was.  What's really great -- and I think there's videos of Joe signing checks.  I mean, it's more automated now, but it is really gratifying to have -- to see a stack of checks go out to thousands of artists all over the world for stuff that we've made together and feeling good that everybody feels good.  Not only about the stuff that we've made, but about how -- what they were paid and how they were paid.  
>> Great, thanks.  So, Anna, the nature of Gather is local and intimate.  And so presumably that affects the way that you can scale.  So I'm wondering, how do you think of it as an asset and how is it a limitation?  
>> Yeah, that's such a good question.  And I think we are in such beginning stages of our business that it remains to be seen how that's actually going to play out.  But I do think that first of all, the localness, if you want to call it that, of Gather is truly an asset because it allows people to -- and I think people have this compulsion -- I know in Minnesota this is the case anyway, to want to dig deep into something really close to home that when we feel really good about spending dollars from an artist like two blocks from our house or we feel even better when we realize that our contribution went to creating a commission that would never have happened without my small little contribution from the artist in northeast.  So I think there's something really gratifying about that.  I also think that it helps really create, generate an audience that has the capability of transforming individual artist's lives.  So that there's truly a mechanism by which the community can impact the continued development of a local arts economy, which is something that we think a lot about in Minneapolis.  So I think that that is an asset, and that's really something that we want to promote and foster.  I imagine that Gather will begin to extend, and we already kind of do between Minnesota and Wisconsin, that there's kind of an upper Midwestern region that we'll be really kind of focusing on developing.  And as far as scaling beyond that, I think there's that compulsion exists in other communities.  And so the way that we imagine expansion is to actually franchise in kind of a weird way, but to have individual artists and kind of groups of people to curate because I think curation is really essentially to our process as well. But to curate a similarly locally-based version of Gather in different corners of the U.S.  So we're not sure how that's going to happen.  We're kind of like trying to dig deep right now into the Minneapolis, St. Paul, and bigger Minnesota market.  But I think it has a lot of potential.  Like I said, people really do like supporting local.  And also being able to kind of point at something on their wall and say, "Not only is that a cool piece, but it's from across town.  I actually met the person that made that."  And there's just like a lot of warm fuzzies about that.  So we want to continue to promote that.  
>> Sure.  All right, thanks.  Chase.  CreativeLive enables revenue stream for creators who are also educators by paying instructors to teach courses.  So what philosophies do you have in selecting and working with these instructors? 
>> I'll borrow your term.  Curation.  It's absolutely critical that the people that are teaching at CreativeLive are the best.  There are many sort of marketplaces, online education marketplaces -- I don't need to name them.  The way I describe it, though, is they're an inch deep and a mile wide.  And they really don't care who's on their platform.  It is sort of something that was by and large created in a -- I know most of these companies very intimately and they, by and large, were created by MBA's with business plans to scale online education.  We consider ourselves very, very focused on creativity.  Photography, design, video, music and audio, crafts, the maker movement, and the ability to make a living and a life, and all those things.  And so for us, we want to serve a community, a community of creators who are going from zero to one or one to ten.  And in that world, our name, our brand, the value that we bring to our students is all we have.  And so taking that lightly would be something that I wouldn't advocate as the founder and CEO, and deciding who gets to be the people who teach our future artists is a thing that we don't take lightly.  We take that very, very seriously because we're trying to arm these creators with the skills that they need to go into the future.  And we're all literally assembled here on World IP Day because the future is so uncertain and we need the stewards of our future to be people who are validated, who are carefully curated to sort of help the rising tide float all the boats.  So we're meticulous about it.  I wouldn't bore you with the actual details, but it has to do with being great at what you do and also have teaching skills.  It's no different -- think of the best teachers -- actually do this.  Think of the best teachers you ever had.  They were not the smartest.  They were part entertaining, part wise, very much human, and those are the people that we seek to bring on our platform.  So it's not just the people with the most papers.  It's not the people who have the most experience.  It's the people who are great teachers, that connect.  You like to say that there's a human being behind the pieces of art, and we want our instructors, our experts to be world class, to be all these things and to be able to connect with a community.  So we take that very, very seriously, something I'm super proud of.  
>> Great, thanks.  Jared, you probably came to your project with certain goals and philosophies.  Has HITRECORD exceeded your expectations or taught you new things about the creative process?  
>> Well, yeah.  I think one of the most inspiring things about HITRECORD for me is that there's no end to the creativity that is contributed every day, whether that's writing or music or animation or -- I mean, stop motion, claymation, all sorts of things.  And what's -- one of the things that I've learned is the more people who have a say and the more people who are a part of the art that we make, the richer these stories, the richer the art is, the more perspectives.  ^M01:20:43 And we just hear stories that we just never would have written ourselves because we just didn't -- we don't have that experience.   When we were doing the first season of our television show, the first episode of our show was regarding -- we had art and ideas and -- about regarding a different theme.  Each episode is regarding a different theme.  And the first episode was regarding the number one.  And we had a -- we had a -- we put out a call to action to say, "Tell us about your -- tell us your stories regarding your first time."  And that was your first time doing anything.  So people wrote all sorts of stories, contributed stories, and one girl wrote a story about the first time that she saw the stars when she was 16 years old.  She has a rare eye disorder where she can't see pinpoints of light.  And when she was 16, her Dad bought her night vision goggles to allow her to see the stars for the first time.  And that's just a story that we never would have heard if we just hired a bunch of writers in Hollywood in a writer's room.  But when you have such a huge community of artists that are contributing ideas to these stories, I think that's the most surprising thing is every collaboration that we do is you never know -- we always have to throw caution to the wind whenever we -- and can't plan too much about where we're going to go with a certain project because we go where the community wants to go.  It's where we -- where's the story going?  And I think that's -- again, one of the most surprising things and the thing that I love about creating art in a digital space is that you just have the scale of people with different ideas.  
>> That was the last question?
^M01:22:46
[ Inaudible ] 
^M01:22:48
Okay.  All right.  Well, I guess we're to the last question.  Okay.  Can each of you briefly state what do you think the future holds?  And let's start with Jared.  
>> Future. 
>> Future holds. Specifically, I imagine, with regards to art making and the digital space and copyright.  I think -- first of all, I think -- and one of the things I was thinking about on the plane ride over here was just the fact that World IP Day exists and people are learning more about what that means and educating artists as to the value of their contribution is a huge step forward in us not only understanding what the value of our ideas in art is but what we can do about it.  And so I'm -- I think it's going to be an evolution.  I think there's always going to be a push and pull and -- but I'm extremely optimistic just -- and I said it earlier, but meeting everybody here who is so passionate about copyright and figuring things out with artists, I think it's a challenging time, but it's a really inspiring and exciting time to be a part of this.  There's -- I think it's -- what a pressing issue and what an exciting time to help to start figuring these things out.  
>> Excellent.  Anna? 
>> That is such an amazing question. 
>> No wrong answers.
>> Yeah, no.  It's true.  I think about this a lot actually just from the perspective of the other work that I do, which is to help artists grow in their own professional development and grow their businesses and grow their living and a life -- that's such a wonderful slogan.  That's what we work really hard to do at Springboard.  And I think there's this really interesting tension between collaboration -- this is a word that I think all of us talk about -- and then also having an individual voice.  And I think that something in the future will present a "yes, and" solution to this tension in such a way where our human species, the creativity that happens when human beings get together to make art work and to push our culture forward, which is truly the most inspirational thing I can think of.  When that can happen and also acknowledge all of the individual voices that went into that happening, and I'm so inspired by all of the efforts that everyone here on the stage are making to do that, so I think that is an optimistic what I think will happen in the future for the arts and for artists is this, again, realization of the movement forward as a collective and also the individual voice being recognized.
>> Great, great.  Chase, the future?
>> I'm inspired by my stage mates here.  I think Jared, you said it well with -- it's an exciting time.  We used the word tension a lot last night as well.  I think it is the most exciting time in the history of the world to be a creator.  I think there is a tension around sort of preserving that in a way that maintains sustenance for the people who create.  As the world sort of commodifies so many things and goods are being made cheaper and cheaper all the time and in many ways, intellectual property is becoming commoditized, how do we keep this from being a problem?  To me, that is a very, very -- it is the responsibility -- I'm honored to hear that people love World IP Day.  That you are out there thinking about that on a daily basis.  I believe deeply that this is very much a packaging and an access challenge.  The packaging -- I have litigated against a publicly traded company.  I want to say thanks to Gene Mopsik from the ASMP for helping to support it, five years, hundreds of thousands of dollars in costs.  I had a -- it was against -- I'll just say it, it was against K2, a ski manufacturer.  It's a well-documented case.  It was more than 150 infringements.  Cost me five years of my life.  I had to testify in federal court for three days by an attorney that was making 12 hundred dollars an hour to be there.  And that -- we won that case and had to appeal our own victory because the judgment was written in such a way that it was bad for artists.  So we appealed that, and it went to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals where we won that as well.  And I loved the opening remarks because if you think that cost me hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to do that, and what K2, the reason -- I had a voice message that accidentally was removed at some point from my message because it was saved so long of the vice president saying really unpleasant things to me like, "You don't know who you're f-----g with."  And if that is the plight of artists going forward, we're in a real bad spot.  If the people in this room can usurp that mentality and if we can through a packaging exercise of making -- World IP Day is a great step, but let's make it sexy to understand that there is value in our creators.  Let's create access to that information because access to information is really what helps sort of the tide rise with all the boats.  By and large, I find that most of my peers who are struggling to make a living and a life is because they either have not chosen to or they don't have an understanding of access to that information.  So my ask is that that is what the committees, the Copyright Office, Congress consider as their sort of their future, their future moves.  It's an incredibly exciting time.  It's a little bit dangerous, and I believe our fate is in good hands.  Good shall persevere.  
^M01:29:26
[ Inaudible ] 
^M01:29:30
>> All right, so we're going to open it up to the audience if anybody has any questions.  I believe there are microphones, so if you could wait for the mic.  Don't be shy.  
>> Come on, you guys.  We came all the way across the country for this.  
>> Now's your chance. 
^M01:29:51
There's a gift for the first person who asks.
^M01:29:55
>> Hi.  My name is [inaudible], the US editor for a magazine called Music Week, and I cover copyright issues.  Oh, thank you for the gift.  That's lovely.  I didn't know there was one.  I thought you were just -- The Copyright Alliance serves a purpose -- there's one thing in the videos and also in a couple of things that you said about information wants to be free.  Isn't there a problem when every time you mention the work of art, actually it becomes information, i.e. one and zero.  And the semantics are important in a sense that whenever -- and it really used to upset me when I think information wants to be free.  ^M01:30:35 Therefore, we can access music.  We can access photography, etc.  These are not -- this is not information.  These are works of art.  So shouldn't we start by instead of saying information, saying that these are works of art and that will help everyone to actually understand what it is?  
>> To be clear, I was talking about information in terms of access to the information about art, not actually about art in and of itself.  But I understand very, very deeply your -- how the challenge exists there.  Again, I dropped out of a Ph.D. in the Philosophy of Art so this is really, really an interesting area for me.  The -- I guess I don't want to pretend that it's not complicated.  And if we've had some of the brightest thinkers of our times struggling in politics, in the Copyright Office, in our government and governments all over the world -- if there's a real challenge to overcoming these problems, I don't think one of us from the stage is going to answer it.  But let's actually acknowledge that what you've said is the central problem.  There really is a gap between saying well, this is just a mess and what do we do about it, and saying actually, let's identify the problem.  The problem is that is one very precise problem that we need to try and solve.  And to say that it's just too big for us to tackle.  We have a history  in this country.  Our law was created over time.  We didn't just walk out and say this is the law.  I think I know just a little bit about the philosophy of law, and it was created over time, and it continues to evolve.  We have to put a stake in the ground and saying these are a couple of the central challenges that we're going to try and solve.  And if we don't put a pin in those things and start working toward that solution, we certainly will never get there.  You know that saying?  If you don't have a map, you're not going to get where you're going.  You can't just walk in the woods.  Or even a broken clock is right twice a day, whatever that saying is.  We need to identify the problem.  Keep going.  Come on, you guys. 
>> To build upon what you were saying, there is a -- I think there is a culture because that is the central problem.  Well, I'll just share this music or I have no -- people might be predisposed to be fine with just taking music or in essence, stealing music, because that's just the culture that we're now living in.  And I think that you said it right.  All right, now I think it's really raising our hands and saying actually this, understanding that this is a problem, understanding that this way of thinking shouldn't be the way of thinking and then figuring out well, how do we deal with this?  But it is -- I do think that we are living in a culture where I think there are a lot of people who just think it's okay because it's so easy.  How could something so easy not be okay?  So it's identifying that problem and then figuring it out.  
>> And also I think identifying where there are solutions already embedded into that question and the problem because what I find is that artists don't -- smaller artists, anyway, don't tend to have the problem of too much exposure.  In fact, they really need more exposure and that idea of turning what they do into information that can be widely distributed is often times the thing that gives them the living and the life that they can then build upon.  And so, yeah, I think there's -- I'm going to use the word tension again because it -- certainly -- maybe it's the two sides of the same coin that there is the asset to information going out to the masses and then there's also what we have to do is protect that too.  Yeah.
>> Hi.  How would your company protect -- okay, say if I was to submit something to your company, a picture, and how would you protect that from those who are trying to make a income, a passive income?  Say Amazon has a way where you can copyright somebody's work.  With HITRECORD, how would you protect the work that I submit?
>> If I'm understanding your -- I don't know the Amazon service that you're referencing -- if I'm to understand your question correctly.  If you were to upload a picture and somebody else were to download it and try to make money off of it outside of the website, actually we -- it gets back to the question about non-exclusivity.  We don't represent -- if you were to do that and it happens -- I shouldn't say that it happens -- I'm not aware of a case where somebody would download a photo and make money, but I know that there are cases where people would download art off of our site and perhaps put it on Tumblr or on Facebook and perhaps there's a monetization stream that way.  But we don't represent the artists for protection against that sort of thing.  And if we did, we would then require the exclusive rights to your IP because then we can represent you.  There is an infrastructure for us to do that.  We essentially have a license for us to work with and to monetize along with other people's art.  So I guess the short answer is that could happen.  That's for the artist to represent themselves.  That is to say when people make us aware that things are going on with either one member or a combination -- if somebody takes your photo and combines it with another member's photo and tries to do something with it, we do make best efforts to try to make it right.  But at the end of the day, we don't have the authority to speak on behalf of the artists because we don't have that kind of license.  
>> I think we have to end.  Sorry.
>> Okay.
>> They'll be here briefly, I think, after the event if you'd like to talk to them a little bit.  But would you please help me thank them for being here today? 
^M01:37:26
[ Applause ]
^M01:37:33
As Register, I'll take the liberty of offering a few closing remarks.  Just summarizing what I just heard.  Obviously, being an artist from what you can tell is an extremely disciplined craft and a lifetime craft at that.  I agree wholeheartedly with Chase and his observation that you should not, if you're an artist listening to this today or will listen to it later on our website -- don't underestimate participation from our nation's artists in the copyright debates going on currently.  It would be illogical to have a copyright act that does not protect and support our creative voices.  We're doing our best in the Copyright Office.  There are many organizations that obviously agree with that principle.  Certainly, Congress does, but they need to hear from you.  I'm tempted to provide the recommendation to Congress that they should take Jared's business model of giving everybody two weeks to weigh in on any proposal that comes off the Hill, and then they'll make a decision.  I'm not sure it'll go that way.  So instead, I'll end with Anna's observation that of course, even in the copyright debate, there is a tension between expressing one's individual goals or perspective and then collaborating with others.  And of course, we have to have both so here's to working together for the next great Copyright Act.  Thanks.
>> This has been a presentation of the Library of Congress.  Visit us at loc.gov.